1960 US Census | Statistics & Facts

US Census in 1960

The 1960 United States Census marked a transformational moment in American demographic history, representing not just a count of the nation’s population but a comprehensive snapshot of a country experiencing unprecedented growth and social change. Conducted as of April 1, 1960, this eighteenth decennial census recorded a total population of 179,323,175 persons across the 50 states and the District of Columbia, reflecting a remarkable 19 percent increase from the 1950 count of 151,325,798. This dramatic population surge captured the essence of the post-World War II baby boom era, revealing a nation that was rapidly expanding, urbanizing, and redefining itself on multiple demographic fronts.

What distinguished the 1960 census from its predecessors was the revolutionary implementation of mail-out questionnaires as the primary data collection method for urban residents. This groundbreaking approach represented the first time all urban residents received combined population and housing questionnaires by mail, fundamentally changing how the Census Bureau gathered information from American households. The innovation streamlined data collection processes and set precedents for future censuses, demonstrating the Bureau’s commitment to modernization and efficiency. The census enumerated detailed characteristics across 308 comprehensive tables, covering everything from inhabitants and general population characteristics to intricate social and economic indicators, providing researchers and policymakers with an unprecedented wealth of demographic information about mid-century America.

Interesting Stats & Facts About the 1960 US Census

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 1960 Census of Population, Final Reports and Supplementary Reports Series (census.gov)

Understanding the 1960 Census Data Landscape

The 1960 census data reveals fascinating insights into American society at a pivotal moment in the nation’s history. The total population of 179.3 million represented not merely numerical growth but fundamental demographic shifts that would shape America’s future. The fact that the median age declined to 29.5 years marked an extraordinary historical anomaly, driven by the post-war baby boom that created a youth bulge in the population structure. This demographic phenomenon had profound implications for education systems, housing markets, and consumer patterns throughout the 1960s and beyond, as this massive cohort moved through different life stages.

The implementation of the first mail-out census methodology demonstrated the Census Bureau’s forward-thinking approach to data collection challenges in an increasingly complex and urbanized society. While earlier censuses had used self-enumeration on limited scales, 1960 marked the comprehensive debut of this technique as the primary collection method for urban areas. The 25% sample receiving extended questionnaires with over 100 questions allowed for detailed statistical analysis while managing the practical constraints of full population enumeration. Meanwhile, the 70% of Americans living in their birth state reflected a nation still characterized by regional stability, even as internal migration patterns were beginning to accelerate. The foreign-born population’s median age of 57.2 years compared to 27.8 years for native-born Americans illustrated how immigration restrictions implemented after World War I had created a demographic gap that would influence policy debates for decades to come.

Total Population Growth in the US in 1960

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 1960 Census of Population: Advance Reports, Final Population Counts (PC-A1) and Supplementary Reports: Birthplace and Country of Origin (PC-S1-28)

The population growth of nearly 28 million people between 1950 and 1960 represented one of the most dramatic increases in American demographic history. This 19% growth rate exceeded expectations and reflected the sustained impact of the baby boom that had begun immediately after World War II. The native-born population increase of 29.4 million more than compensated for the decline of 600,000 in the foreign-born population, demonstrating how natural increase rather than immigration was driving national population growth during this period. The aging and declining foreign-born population reflected decades of restrictive immigration policies that had fundamentally altered America’s demographic composition.

The interstate migration figure of 45.8 million Americans living outside their birth states showed that while the majority of Americans remained in their home states, internal mobility was accelerating. This 30.5% increase in interstate migrants from 1950 suggested growing economic opportunities and changing employment patterns that encouraged geographic relocation. The data captured a nation in transition, where traditional regional ties remained strong but were increasingly challenged by expanding job markets, particularly in growing Sunbelt states and suburban areas. These migration patterns would intensify throughout the 1960s, reshaping regional demographics and political power distributions that continue to influence American society today.

Age Distribution in the US in 1960

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 1960 Census Supplementary Reports: Age of the Population of the United States (PC-S1-11 and PC-S1-25)

The historic decline in median age to 29.5 years represented an unprecedented demographic shift that had never occurred before in American census history. Throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the nation’s median age had consistently increased as the population matured and life expectancy improved. The reversal in 1960 dramatically illustrated the power of the baby boom, which added millions of children and young adults to the population base, effectively rejuvenating the nation’s age structure. This youthful population surge created enormous demands on educational infrastructure, with school construction and teacher hiring accelerating throughout the decade.

The disparity between the nonwhite median age of 23.5 years and the white median age of 30.3 years revealed significant demographic differences that reflected varying fertility patterns and socioeconomic factors. The foreign-born population’s median age of 57.2 years continued to climb as this cohort aged without substantial replacement through new immigration, creating an increasingly elderly immigrant population. The 36.3% increase in the under-18 population to 64.5 million represented the baby boom’s full impact, while the 34.1% growth in the 65-and-over population to 16.5 million foreshadowed the aging challenges that would emerge when the baby boom generation reached retirement age decades later. These age structure dynamics would profoundly influence policy decisions regarding education, Social Security, healthcare, and workforce planning throughout subsequent decades.

Racial and Ethnic Composition in the US in 1960

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 1960 Census Supplementary Reports: Race of the Population of the United States, by States (PC-S1-10)

The racial composition data from the 1960 census captured America at a critical juncture in its civil rights history, with demographic patterns reflecting decades of migration, regional economic development, and social transformation. While the white population grew by 17.5%, the nonwhite population increased by 26.7%, demonstrating differential growth rates that slowly altered the nation’s racial composition. The white population’s 88.6% share in 1960 compared to 89.3% in 1950 showed relatively modest compositional change despite significantly different growth rates, revealing how numerical majorities can persist even with substantial proportional differences in demographic expansion.

The regional distribution of the nonwhite population told a compelling story of the Great Migration’s continuing impact, as African Americans moved from the rural South to urban centers in the North, Midwest, and West seeking economic opportunities and escaping Jim Crow segregation. The nonwhite population share in the South declined from 64.0% to 56.1% of all nonwhite Americans, while the Northeast experienced 54.8% growth, the North Central region saw 54.7% increase, and the West recorded 52.6% growth in nonwhite populations. These massive migration patterns fundamentally transformed urban demographics in cities like Chicago, Detroit, New York, Los Angeles, and Philadelphia, creating new cultural centers and altering political landscapes. The South’s white population growth of 18.0% compared to only 11.1% nonwhite growth reflected the continued out-migration that would reshape both Southern and Northern communities throughout the civil rights era.

Urban and Rural Population Distribution in the US in 1960

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 1960 Census Supplementary Reports: Urban and Rural Population (PC-S1-4); Population of Urbanized Areas (PC-S1-5); Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (PC-3-1D)

The urban population’s dominance at 69.9% of the total demonstrated that America had completed its transformation from a predominantly rural to an overwhelmingly urban nation. The 29.3% increase in urban population far outpaced overall national growth, revealing powerful urbanization trends that concentrated Americans in cities and metropolitan areas. The urbanized areas’ 35.2% growth to 95.8 million people reflected the expansion of major city centers and their surrounding communities, creating the metropolitan complexes that would define modern American geography. Cities with populations exceeding 50,000 inhabitants anchored these urbanized areas, drawing migrants from rural regions and smaller towns.

The rural population’s near stagnation masked dramatic internal changes, with the rural farm population declining by 20.5% to just 12.8 million people, representing only 7.1% of all Americans. This agricultural exodus reflected mechanization, consolidation, and economic pressures that made small-scale farming increasingly unviable. Meanwhile, the rural nonfarm population grew by 4.9%, suggesting that some rural areas maintained populations through manufacturing, resource extraction, or residential development while shedding agricultural employment. The Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas’ 63.0% population share demonstrated how metropolitan regions had become the primary organizing structure of American settlement patterns, concentrating economic activity, cultural institutions, and political power in ways that would intensify throughout subsequent decades.

Housing Characteristics in the US in 1960

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 1960 Census of Housing: Volume I. States and Small Areas; Volume II. Metropolitan Housing

The housing data from 1960 revealed a nation investing heavily in residential construction and achieving unprecedented homeownership rates. The 61.9% homeownership rate represented the culmination of post-war housing policies, including Federal Housing Administration and Veterans Administration loan programs that made homeownership accessible to millions of middle-class families. The 16.1 million units built during the 1950s constituted 27.7% of the entire housing stock, demonstrating the massive construction boom that accompanied suburban expansion and population growth. This building surge created the iconic suburban subdivisions that reshaped American residential patterns and family life.

The 94% of housing units with complete plumbing facilities showed substantial progress in housing quality, though the remaining 3.1 million units lacking complete plumbing reminded observers that significant pockets of substandard housing persisted, particularly in rural areas and inner-city neighborhoods. The median home value of $11,900 and median rent of $71 per month reflected housing costs in an era before the dramatic price escalations of later decades, when housing affordability was substantially greater relative to median incomes. The median of 4.9 rooms per unit indicated typical family home sizes during this period, before the trend toward larger suburban homes accelerated in subsequent decades. These housing statistics captured American residential patterns at a moment when suburban growth was reshaping metropolitan landscapes and defining new middle-class lifestyles centered on homeownership, automobile dependency, and family-oriented communities.

Educational Attainment in the US in 1960

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 1960 Census of Population: Volume I. Characteristics of the Population, Detailed Characteristics

The educational attainment statistics from 1960 revealed a nation in educational transition, with significant portions of the adult population having limited formal schooling while younger cohorts increasingly completed high school and pursued college education. The median of 10.6 years of schooling indicated that the typical American adult had completed some high school but had not earned a diploma, reflecting educational patterns from earlier decades when high school completion was less universal. The 41.9% of adults with only elementary education or less demonstrated how many Americans, particularly older individuals, had entered the workforce with minimal formal education, a pattern that was rapidly changing as educational expectations rose.

The 24.7% high school completion rate represented substantial progress compared to earlier generations, while the combined 15.7% with some college or college degrees showed that higher education remained relatively uncommon, primarily accessible to middle and upper-class families. The gender difference with females averaging 11.2 years compared to males’ 10.3 years of median education reflected various factors, including male participation in trade apprenticeships and military service that interrupted formal schooling. These educational patterns would transform dramatically in subsequent decades as high school completion became nearly universal and college attendance expanded significantly, driven by economic changes that increasingly required advanced education for middle-class employment. The 1960 statistics captured education at a transitional moment, with the GI Bill generation completing college and baby boomers beginning to enter the educational system in unprecedented numbers.

Labor Force Participation in the US in 1960

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 1960 Census of Population: Volume I. Characteristics of the Population, Social and Economic Characteristics

The labor force participation data from 1960 captured American employment patterns during an era of economic prosperity and industrial strength. The overall participation rate of 59.4% reflected a workforce dominated by male breadwinners, with the 83.3% male participation rate representing near-universal employment for men of working age. The 37.7% female participation rate showed that while women’s workforce involvement remained substantially lower than men’s, millions of women were working outside the home, challenging traditional gender roles and foreshadowing the dramatic increases in female labor force participation that would occur in subsequent decades.

The occupational distribution revealed an economy transitioning from manufacturing dominance toward service and information sectors. The 43.4% white-collar employment showed that professional, managerial, and clerical work had become the largest employment category, surpassing the 36.7% in blue-collar manufacturing and construction jobs. The precipitous decline in farm employment to just 7.2% demonstrated how thoroughly agriculture had shed labor through mechanization and consolidation, completing a transformation that had accelerated throughout the twentieth century. The relatively low 5.5% unemployment rate reflected strong economic conditions during 1960, though this figure masked regional disparities and structural challenges facing certain industries and communities. These employment patterns established foundations for the service economy that would dominate American economic life by the century’s end, while industrial employment began the long decline that would reshape American manufacturing regions.

Income Distribution in the US in 1960

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 1960 Census of Population: Volume I. Characteristics of the Population, Detailed Characteristics

The income distribution statistics from 1960 revealed economic patterns of an era when a single breadwinner’s income could support a middle-class family, though significant economic inequalities persisted along racial and regional lines. The median family income of $5,620 represented comfortable middle-class living by 1960 standards, when housing costs, education, and healthcare consumed smaller portions of family budgets than in subsequent decades. The income distribution showed a concentration in the middle ranges, with 62.3% of families earning between $3,000 and $9,999 annually, creating a broad middle class that became the defining characteristic of post-war American prosperity.

However, the stark racial income disparity with nonwhite families earning only 55% of white family incomes exposed persistent economic inequality that would become a central focus of civil rights advocacy and anti-poverty programs throughout the 1960s. The 23.5% of families earning under $3,000 represented Americans living in or near poverty, many concentrated in rural areas, inner cities, and regions experiencing economic transition. The relatively small 4.5% earning $15,000 or more indicated that high incomes remained concentrated among a modest elite, while the broad middle-income ranges created economic conditions favorable to consumer spending, homeownership, and upward mobility expectations. These income patterns, adjusted for inflation, represent approximately $56,900 in 2025 median family income, illustrating how dramatically economic conditions have evolved over six decades.

Geographic Distribution and Regional Growth in the US in 1960

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 1960 Census of Population: Volume I. Characteristics of the Population, Number of Inhabitants

The regional population distribution in 1960 revealed dramatic shifts in American settlement patterns, with the West’s extraordinary 38.9% growth rate far exceeding other regions and signaling the beginning of sustained Sunbelt expansion that would transform American demographics and political power. California’s remarkable 48.5% growth added over 5 million residents during the 1950s, making it the nation’s most populous state and a symbol of westward migration driven by defense industries, entertainment, agriculture, and favorable climate. The West’s 15.6% population share understated its growing influence, as rapid growth rates indicated it would continue gaining residents and political representation.

The Northeast’s modest 13.2% growth and North Central region’s 16.1% increase showed these established industrial regions still expanding but at rates below the national average, foreshadowing relative decline that would accelerate in subsequent decades as manufacturing employment shifted. The South’s 16.5% growth represented a reversal of historical out-migration patterns, as economic development, air conditioning, and civil rights progress made southern states increasingly attractive to businesses and residents. New York’s status as the most populous state with 16.8 million residents would soon be eclipsed by California’s explosive growth. Pennsylvania’s slow 7.8% growth exemplified challenges facing older industrial states, while Texas’s strong 24.2% expansion demonstrated the economic dynamism of emerging Sunbelt states. These regional patterns established trajectories that would fundamentally reshape American political geography, with population and congressional representation flowing toward the South and West throughout the remainder of the twentieth century and into the twenty-first.

Metropolitan Growth and Urbanization in the US in 1960

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 1960 Census of Population: Selected Area Reports: Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (PC-3-1D)

The metropolitan growth patterns documented in 1960 captured one of the most significant demographic transformations in American history: the explosive expansion of suburban communities surrounding central cities. The 212 Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas containing 112.9 million residents represented 63% of the national population, demonstrating how thoroughly metropolitan regions had become the dominant form of American settlement. The 26.4% SMSA growth rate substantially exceeded the 19% national growth rate, revealing powerful centripetal forces drawing Americans toward metropolitan areas while rural regions stagnated or declined.

The most striking feature of metropolitan growth was the divergence between central cities growing at 10.8% and suburban rings exploding at 48.6%. This suburban boom reflected multiple converging factors: federal highway construction enabling automobile commuting, Federal Housing Administration and Veterans Administration mortgage programs favoring new suburban construction, white flight from racially integrating urban neighborhoods, desire for larger homes with private yards, and corporate relocation to suburban office parks. The 24 metropolitan areas exceeding 1 million population contained 69.7 million residents, establishing the mega-metropolitan regions that would dominate American economic and cultural life. The growth across all metropolitan size categories showed that suburbanization was not limited to the largest cities but represented a fundamental reorganization of American settlement patterns affecting communities nationwide. This metropolitan expansion created the sprawling suburban landscapes, automobile dependency, and spatial segregation that would define late twentieth-century America while simultaneously straining urban cores that lost middle-class tax bases.

Household Composition in the US in 1960

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 1960 Census of Population and Housing: Families and Household Composition (PHC-1)

The household composition data from 1960 revealed family structures that epitomized the idealized nuclear family era, with 74% of households consisting of married couples and the average household size of 3.33 persons reflecting the baby boom’s impact on family formation. The dominance of married-couple households represented peak conformity to traditional family structures, supported by economic conditions that enabled single-earner families to achieve middle-class living standards. The 51.3% of households with children present demonstrated that child-rearing remained central to household organization, with the average of 4.22 persons in these households showing families commonly included two or three children.

However, beneath the surface of nuclear family dominance, alternative household forms existed in substantial numbers. The 8.3% of female-headed households without husbands present indicated divorced, widowed, and never-married women managing households, often facing economic challenges in an era when women’s earnings lagged significantly behind men’s. The 15.3% non-family households including 13% one-person households showed millions of Americans living alone or with non-relatives, challenging assumptions about universal family living arrangements. The relatively small 2.3% of male-headed households without wives reflected gender norms that typically awarded child custody to mothers following divorce. These household patterns would transform dramatically in subsequent decades as divorce rates climbed, cohabitation increased, marriage rates declined, and single-person households proliferated, making the 1960 snapshot a high-water mark for traditional family structures that would never again dominate American household composition to the same degree.

The 1960 United States Census documented a nation at a demographic crossroads, capturing population patterns and social structures that would soon undergo profound transformation. The baby boom generation enumerated as children and young adults in 1960 would drive massive social changes throughout subsequent decades, from the youth movements of the 1960s through their current retirement years reshaping healthcare and Social Security systems. The suburban expansion, metropolitan concentration, and regional shifts toward the Sunbelt that were clearly visible in 1960 established trajectories that continue reshaping American geography and politics into 2025. The racial composition data and migration patterns captured a society on the cusp of civil rights transformation, with demographic movements setting the stage for political and social upheavals that would redefine American identity.

Looking forward from today’s perspective, the 1960 census data provides essential historical context for understanding contemporary demographic challenges and opportunities. The youthful population captured in 1960 contrasts sharply with today’s aging society, as the baby boomers enter retirement in unprecedented numbers, creating fiscal pressures and healthcare demands. The overwhelmingly native-born population of 1960 transformed through immigration reform in 1965, producing today’s far more diverse and immigrant-rich nation. The metropolitan and suburban patterns established in 1960 intensified throughout subsequent decades, creating challenges of sprawl, infrastructure maintenance, and environmental sustainability that policymakers currently address. The educational attainment levels, income distributions, and labor force characteristics documented in 1960 established baselines against which contemporary economic and social mobility can be measured, revealing both progress achieved and persistent inequalities requiring continued attention. As researchers and policymakers analyze demographic trends and plan for future challenges, the 1960 census remains an indispensable reference point for understanding how America arrived at its current demographic profile and what historical patterns might suggest about trajectories ahead.

Disclaimer: This research report is compiled from publicly available sources. While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, no representation or warranty, express or implied, is given as to the completeness or reliability of the information. We accept no liability for any errors, omissions, losses, or damages of any kind arising from the use of this report.

Email ID:

Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.

Email

Email *

SUBSCRIBE